Health workers violated medical ethics when they helped interrogate terrorism suspects who were tortured at secret CIA prisons overseas, the International Committee of the Red Cross said.
The medical workers, thought to be doctors and psychologists, monitored prisoners while they were mistreated at CIA prisons and advised interrogators whether to continue, adjust or halt the abuse, the ICRC said in a report based on interviews with 14 prisoners in 2007.
One prisoner alleged that medical personnel monitored his blood oxygen levels while he was subjected to waterboarding, a simulated drowning designed to induce panic and widely considered to be torture, the ICRC said.
Other prisoners said that as they stood shackled with their arms chained above their heads, a doctor regularly measured the swelling in their legs and signaled when they should be allowed to sit down.
The ICRC interviewed 14 men who had been held in secret CIA prisons overseas before being sent to the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, in 2006…
The ICRC monitors compliance with the Geneva Conventions governing the treatment of war captives and keeps its reports secret, sharing them only with the detaining government…
A previously undisclosed portion of the report concluded that medical workers who monitored or took part in the interrogations had violated their ethical duty to do no harm, preserve dignity and act in patients’ best interest…
Bush administration officials have said the “enhanced interrogation” of those prisoners produced information that helped thwart attacks but have never provided specifics.
Politicians defending torture now fight to keep the truth under wraps.
Don’t waste too much time distracted by the barrage of rationales. There is only one question under consideration – and that will be judged by the record. When the records are allowed into the light of day.
One obvious change needed is ending the complicity of succeeding governments in the cover-up of crimes committed by their predecessors.
We all understand why they do it. No honest justification.
So a “moral” doc would not have participated in the torture and unskilled people would have monitored the O2 level in the blood==probably just as accurately as any doc could do–ie==its just reading a number on a scale.
Well, that assume anyone at the time would have known the UPCOMING procedure was legally/morally torture. Some believe torturing terrorists is moral. Gonzales gave written opinions it was legal.
The crime was committed at the highest levels, not the lowest ones.
“Health workers violated medical ethics when they helped interrogate terrorism suspects who were tortured at secret CIA prisons overseas,”
So, it’s bad for a doctor to monitor someone being tortured but good to suck the brains out of a baby? Hmmm… I think I’d stick with the doctor who tries to preserve life…
The information was supplied by the terrorists…
And this “alleged” information is supposed to be believable?
The medical workers, thought to be doctors and psychologists,…
the Red Cross does not know? WTF?
I thought this was well known. I guess someone needs to see the Red Cross report to believe it.
Mr. President, this is why we need a Special Prosecutor to investigate crimes committed during the Bush tyranny.
On the one hand, the doctor is doing his/her job ensuring the tortured person person is not injured.
On the other hand, I read something about the Hippocratic Oath saying something about ethical practice of medicine.
I’m so confused! Rush Limbaugh, please explain!!
It’s a good thing Obama has closed Gitmo and this can’t happen any more.
Oh wait – Gitmo is still operating? Prisoners are still be held without trial?
How many terrorists were beheaded by the US? Mutilated? Crippled? Deliberately KILLED by other methods? None. Zero. Zip.
How many US and allied prisoners of terrorists were treated to all of the a fore mentioned? Too many to count and that doesn’t take into account the thousands of Iraqi citizens killed by terrorist thugs and murderers.
You Peace, Love and Understanding Idiotic Infidels will be the first ones thrown into an industrial-sized people chipper some day by these same terrorists you sooooo love and want to protect their rights.
#8. “How many terrorists were beheaded by the US? Mutilated? Crippled? Deliberately KILLED by other methods? None. Zero. Zip.”
Are you naive or just an imbecile. I’ll forgive that statement if your just an imbecile. Mommy, protect me from those bad terrorists.
lol.
#4 said
And this “alleged” information is supposed to be believable?
That depends. They could be lying and saying anything to stop being water boarded.
Or you could water board two terrorists in separate rooms and tell them that it doesn’t stop until their stories match. Much more accurate results one would guess. Just hope your buddy breaks at the same point as you.
Water boarding is not torture unless everyone here was tortured as a kid when their older brother dunked them underwater. Seriously, grow up people.
# 9 Thomas said, “Are you naive or just an imbecile. I’ll forgive that statement if your just an imbecile. Mommy, protect me from those bad terrorists.”
The true sign of the terminally owned: ad hominem attack while refusing to address the actual point…
#10 Benjamin. Water boarding is not torture unless everyone here was tortured as a kid when their older brother dunked them underwater. Seriously, grow up people.
Good point. If waterboarding is not torture, then what’s the big fuss about? Stoopid liberals.
I took an Hippocratic oath. Funny, I don’t recall anywhere it said do not protect the health and well-being of persons being tortured. Seems to me the ethical violation would have been to NOT monitor the “victims.”
By the way, a key point in the article is: “The medical workers, THOUGHT to be doctors and psychologists…” Medical workers, probably. Doctors and psychologists? Hmmm. Not so sure. There’s a real problem with getting accurate, non-self-serving information from prisoners.
And, I can tell you from personal experience, the ICRC is not exactly neutral in some of these cases. I witnessed them asking very leading questions of victims in Kosovo and Angola. Not saying atrocities did not occur, I know they did.
The Red Cross also has the Red Crescent, but no Red Star of David. Only when the US withheld money did they bring in a Red Crystal. A black mark on the organization, caving in to Muslims like that.
I always though the symbol of the red crescent spoke very poorly of the Muslims.
All informed and intelligent people know the red cross represents two blood stained bandages crossed over a wound. Nothing to do with Christianity or Jesus.
But the Muslims (or at least the Arab Muslims) are so rabidly anti-Christian that they could not see the obvious.
>> Paddy-O said, on April 8th, 2009 at 6:37 am
>> So, it’s bad for a doctor to monitor someone being tortured but good to suck the brains out of a baby?
Goodness, what crimes CAN’T you justify with your opposition to abortion?
(BTW, you mean embryo, blastocyst zygote, etc. but you know that. )
>> Ah_Yea said, on April 8th, 2009 at 8:51 am
>> All informed and intelligent people know the red cross represents two blood stained bandages crossed over a wound. Nothing to do with Christianity or Jesus.
Really? Link, please, before you start insulting all Muslims.
I, too, was under the impression that the Red Cross symbol came from the Swiss Flag, because of their neutrality. It’s origins are likely Christian:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Switzerland
Muslims are hardly alone in not liking to use the religious symbols of others. Come to think of it, who does?
But are Muslims more sensitive than most? That case could be argued, IMO, but your broad criticism based on dubious “facts” is unfair.
As for this specific issue, I’m greatly bothered by it.
If these professional boards, like the AMA, want to have quasi-legal status, then they need to step-up and police their members and the profession in general.
My personal angle on this was the use of mental health facilities in the Soviet Union as a form of torture.
I personally know people who were horribly detained and abused my mental health workers as a form of religious and political oppression.
It sickens and infuriates me that doctors and other medical professionals participated in this.
A few declarations against it were made, but nothing even close to justice or even basic professional standards.
Now, thanks to the Bush Administration, America has become like our former enemy.
#18 conFusion, I don’t normally answer Qs where the answer is known by 99% of the population but, I sometimes take pity on that 1% who are retarded.
http://state.sd.us/applications/ph17abortioninfo/inlet/Abort.htm
Third Trimester Abortion Methods (26 – 40 weeks of pregnancy)
Abdominal hysterotomy
# See above
Intact dilation and extraction (partial birth abortion)
* In this procedure, the physician pulls the fetus feet-first out of the uterus into the birth canal, except for the head which is kept lodged just inside the uterus.
* The base of the fetus’s skull is punctured with a sharp instrument such as a long scissors or pointed metal tube.
* A catheter is inserted into the wound and removes the fetus’s brain with a powerful suction machine. This causes the skull to collapse, and allows for the expulsion of the fetus.
PaddyO, the answer is known by Fusion as well, but you have fallen into his never-ending game.
# 21 MikeN said, “PaddyO, the answer is known by Fusion as well, but you have fallen into his never-ending game.”
Sometimes I’m not sure. He really might be retarded…
Can you imagine what the “mother” of the baby must be experiencing during such an abortion?
Doctor: “Ok, here comes his feet…
Good, got his shoulders…
Ok, now that sound you hear is the catheter cracking through his skull…
Now just ignore the sucking noise as we remove his brain. Just ignore it, don’t have any feelings of remorse or regret…”
#23–Ah Yea==surprised you have joined the knuckle draggers on this one.
My mother aborted what would have been a younger brother of mine. Reasons are complex and layered but “her decision” supported by my father and the docs. She still cries on the due date over her loss these many years later.
Would she do it again? Yes.
These decisions are simple only for the simple minded. Simple or not==they remain the mothers.
To paraphrase Abraham Lincoln: Whenever I hear someone try to defend torture, I feel a strong urge to see it practiced on them personally.
It used to amaze me that right-wingers who bleat so much about “getting the government off our backs” were such slavish supporters of Bush’s Big Brother government… spying without warrants, detaining U.S. citizens indefinitely without filing charges, torturing people, etc. — all violations of our Constitution, which they claim to venerate. But they didn’t say a word while Bush wiped his ass with the Constitution. I don’t know whether it was because they were so terrorized by 9/11 that they were willing to throw away their fundamental rights (in which case the terrorists succeeded) or if they really believe that if a Republican does it, it can’t be wrong.
# 23 Ah_Yea said, “…Just ignore it, don’t have any feelings of remorse or regret…”
And, the Red Cross is more concerned about some health workers who might have kept a torture victim alive rather than doctors who suck brains out of living babies?
No more annual donations to them.
I’m pretty sure the Nuremburg trials established that “I was just following orders” is not a valid defense, so even if these doctors were ordered to assist torture, and it seems that they were, they’re still culpable.
It’s a sad day when Americans are in the same league as Nazi war criminals. Thanks, Dubya.
#24 bobbo
Now why am I joining the knuckle draggers on this one?
As you stated yourself, your mother cries every year, lamenting the life that never was.
Why are you so emotionally disconnected? Haven’t you ever wonder who your younger brother could have been, what you could have done together?
Abortion is always portrayed as a simple, quick, get it done and go on with your life without a care procedure.
It’s not that simple.
#30–Ah Yea==Its not that simple. You seem to understand my mother’s sorrow over her (one) abortion. The whole point of my post and your twisting around it is that it is NOT a simple issue for those who engage in it. I assume YOU would make it illegal for mothers everywhere to exercise their carefully thought out options in favor of your preferences?
“Abortion is always portrayed as a simple, quick, get it done and go on with your life without a care procedure.” — Well, not in this thread but most often by those who wish to simplify and demonize the privacy rights of those who “on balance” decide abortion is the right option. Mom had two daughters after the abortion.
I understand completely why certain folks are against abortion. What I don’t understand is how ANYONE thinkis the power of government should be used to coerce their morality onto other people. Isn’t this what “gun rights” are supposed to protect? NO?–Gun rights exist only to protect gun rights?
Silly knuckle draggers. Voyeurs with no respect for opposing opinions nor understanding of their own rights.
Bobbo, on rare occasions you mystify me.
Where in my original post did I mention anything about Government intervention, or make any statement pro or con? Show me.
I can’t help it if you projected your own ideas and preconceived notions on my post.